Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 8 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[_Mike_]

Opposition supporters coming to troll , you have been warned

 

[Foxman98]

Trade lockouts are so BORINGGGGG

It's so stupid given the deals are done and reported anyway

 

[Mojorisin]

It's so stupid given the deals are done and reported anyway

Jamarra deal is done but I don’t believe its been reported yet?

 

[Insert Username Here]

Florent doesn't have the height/marking capability Davidson has. I'd excuse Davidson having a few moments in his first year, I think next year we will see him go to another level and his overall endeavour/Toughness doesn't worry me.

If Davidson can consistently get to a level even close to that game he had against Carlton in round 3, he'll be an absolute star. Would be great to see him reach his full potential on that wing

 

[Libbaaaa]

Trade lockouts are so BORINGGGGG

Such an amateur look for the biggest sport in the country.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

I don't think he's being paid to be "fine" as "depth." He was signed at his peak and has come off that in a big way since then.

I'll never understand the notion of recruiting somebody as depth. And its something that has really done my head in when it comes to some of the names bandied about this trade period.

If they aren't a likely starting 22 player then its a sideways step at best and a backwards step at worst from a list management point of view.

Florrent would be a step backwards and over a cliffs edge in that regard.

Trade lockouts are so BORINGGGGG

The entire 10 day process is a contrived media event.

I genuinely pity anybody who tunes into Trade Radio.

 

[flamethrower]

The dog are today talking to the Swans about getting involved in the Curnow deal. I'm not sure if its purely picks for a Khamis deal or if it is to include someone like Florent.

Was about to post this but you beat me to it...would love it if we could somehow get Rowbottom involved instead of Florent. The Swans' number 8 would really help our defensive structure. Very Dunkley like player.

 

[MaxiBont]

Was about to post this but you beat me to it...would love it if we could somehow get Rowbottom involved instead of Florent. The Swans' number 8 would really help our defensive structure. Very Dunkley like player.

There’s no chance we get Rowbottom. Would require substantial future picks.

 

[Hoges64]

Was about to post this but you beat me to it...would love it if we could somehow get Rowbottom involved instead of Florent. The Swans' number 8 would really help our defensive structure. Very Dunkley like player.

From all reports there's as much chance of Rowbottom leaving Sydney as I have getting my little tushy spanked by Scarlett Johansson.

 

[_Cerberus_]

No to Florent - yes to second rounder.
Then we can move those two seconds up the order potentially.

I'd be chasing the Swans pick 32. That would leave us with 32 and 33, enough points to target a late first round pick. Especially the Suns, where I think its only a 20 point difference. Will give us a decent hand. Perhaps even trade one into 2026.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

I'll never understand the notion of recruiting somebody as depth. And its something that has really done my head in when it comes to some of the names bandied about this trade period.

Absolutely agree. The goal should be to improve the 15-23 players and push those that previously occupied those spots into depth, rather than recruiting into the 24-30 void.

The only exception to this is specialised positions like ruck where you can only play one or two and need someone to fill in in case of injury.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Off the rails or milking it for every dollar he could? For someone off the rails he was doing a lot of endorsements for gyms on insta.

Mental attitude can play havoc but I would have more sympathy if he'd flown quietly under the radar, taken part in the activities that helped him without the fanfare, and communicated honestly with those trying to help him (we don't actually know what or how or who with he communicated if at all though). Numerous mentors have tried and failed to make an impression. We can only assume his family is also involved.

To see everything totally reversed at the Suns would raise many questions.

 

[Sentinel]

Absolutely agree. The goal should be to improve the 15-23 players and push those that previously occupied those spots into depth, rather than recruiting into the 24-30 void.

The only exception to this is specialised positions like ruck where you can only play one or two and need someone to fill in in case of injury.

Does this not fit for our current KPD stock situation too though?

I agree with the concept that recruiting should be made with improvement to best 23 in mind, but right now I think our KPD stocks (currently 4 deep with O'Donnell, Lobb, Busslinger and Gardner along with the expected departure of Buku) warrant at least one more option on the list even if they aren't necessarily expected to come in and play from round 1.

 

[Mojorisin]

Does this not fit for our current KPD stock situation too though?

I agree with the concept that recruiting should be made with improvement to best 23 in mind, but right now I think our KPD stocks (currently 4 deep with O'Donnell, Lobb, Busslinger and Gardner along with the expected departure of Buku) warrant at least one more option on the list even if they aren't necessarily expected to come in and play from round 1.

I have no issues bringing in depth but the cost has to reflect that.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Absolutely agree. The goal should be to improve the 15-23 players and push those that previously occupied those spots into depth, rather than recruiting into the 24-30 void.

The only exception to this is specialised positions like ruck where you can only play one or two and need someone to fill in in case of injury.

This spins off into another of my hobby horses. Whether Footscray should entirely be an incubator of young talent and a pathway for injured players to return to the fold. With premierships being a secondary concern. Or as somewhere for players who are not quite good enough to play regularly in the AFL the very definition of depth, but are too good for the VFL to thrive and win premierships.

In my view it should be the former. The latter is nice and all, but it shouldn't be the primary driver behind Footscray's existence.

 

[Sentinel]

I have no issues bringing in depth but the cost has to reflect that.

Absolutely. Cheap depth, not a player who comes with a best-23 level contract that we need to honour and intend to have them sit at Footscray.

 

[Mojorisin]

Absolutely. Cheap depth, not a player who comes with a best-23 level contract that we need to honour and intend to have them sit at Footscray.

Similar with price in regards to draft capital. Butts for a 1st for example.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Does this not fit for our current KPD stock situation too though?

I agree with the concept that recruiting should be made with improvement to best 23 in mind, but right now I think our KPD stocks (currently 4 deep with O'Donnell, Lobb, Busslinger and Gardner along with the expected departure of Buku) warrant at least one more option on the list even if they aren't necessarily expected to come in and play from round 1.

The broader conversation I was contributing to was about Florent, not KPDs.

But since you asked: I think a lot depends on how we see the likes of Sellwood/Walker/Croft. Beveridge has never been afraid to go with a smaller KPD setup, and as such, if he's happy with either of the first two chipping in that's problem solved. We also have Williams as a break in case of emergency option. If Croft is viewed as having some capacity to play back, that's even nicer.

In the eyes of the board, playing 3 KPDs means we're only one injury away from Gardner and two injuries away from disaster. In actuality, history at selection suggests that we're probably two injuries away from Gardner and four very unlucky ones away from total disaster.

I would like another KPD but am broadly on board with the club's supposed approach: that they need to be legitimately best 23 or it's not worthwhile. This year it just does not seem like those options are available.

Where I don't agree with the club is that I feel we have not been nearly proactive or aggressive enough in trying to recruit top line KPD talent. Saints have been working on Aleer for two years - it doesn't really seem like we've taken this approach with anybody.

 

[Mojorisin]

I have been told Swans have made their first alterations to the deal for Curnow and the dogs are not involved in it at this stage. Only changes are the removal of pick 22 and Florent.
11, F1 and Hayward for Curnow straight up

 

[iambrilliant]

Pretty sure that’s what they’ve suggested. The lack of punctuation makes things unclear sometimes

I am just a humble carpenter. Punctuation isn’t my strong suit

 

[dogwatch]

Interesting that when the news first broke early / mid-year that he was basically done for the year and it was becoming apparent he wouldn't be playing for us ever again, the public wave of "Geez, the Dogs have been a bit screwed here, he's basically violated his contract, etc they should get some form of compensation" was in FULL swing.

Now when the time actually matters and the AFL hands out compensation picks like Elon Musk hands out Nazi salutes there's crickets and we need to just be grateful that we get his contract off the books?

I don't necessarily agree that GC should be giving us something, but surely an end of 2nd round compo pick, or an exception to the salary cap or something is fair recompense for the money and draft capitol we've laid out for a bloke who HAS violated his contract.

Bet your **** if this was one of the big clubs they and the public would be screaming for it, or it would have already been gifted by this corrupt league.

Good post.
I have no complaints about what GC is doing. Indeed if they can throw him a redemption lifeline I'm very supportive. No reason for them to offer us much at all since they are taking on a considerable risk for a very unlikely (but high) reward.

I think we've been hung out to dry by the AFL though. And that's apart from the possibility of compensation picks.

Devils advocate. What are the option’s?
1. Keep him on the list, he returns to training and builds some value in the VFL (maybe even AFL), and still gets traded next year with his 900k off the books and potentially more value and options at the trade table. Downside is potential playing group / coach cohesion.

2. Keep him on the list, he doesn’t train, is a distraction and we waste 900k on someone not showing up.

3. We trade him now for pick 74 and remove that 900k that we either front load another contract with etc, we move the 50/50 risk off to a competitor and a contender and potentially make them stronger in the process.

4. Keep him on our list, he doesn’t show up and the Dogs chose to fight the AFL/AFLPA in attempting to rip up his contract.

I know what option I’d go with but as it stands that’s what we’ve got.

Essentially what the JUH episode has done is tell the world that a player can default on his AFL contract and still get his full salary without consequences. Some may argue the legal detail on this but its hard to see how he has fulfilled the intent of commitment to train and play for the club.

However this is less about JUH case. More about the impossible situation it puts clubs in generally. And about what signal it will send in future cases.

From what I've read we did everything reasonable to get JUH back on track over about 8 months, at least until mid-year. Then there came a point (perhaps after an internal summit meeting) where the club said "enough". That moment was marked by Bevo saying at a press conference, when asked for the millionth time about Jamarra, that others are handling it now and we need to move on without the ongoing distraction. He said we need to apply our limited player support resources to those who are continuing to train and play for us.

I get the argument against compo picks (ie it's the same sort of situation as Tarryn Thomas etc so stiff cheese) so while a handout like that would be nice it's not something I was expecting. However the AFL should recognise when a contract has been breached and it should allow it to be torn up. This is either BulldogMuscle's option 4, or perhaps it's an option 5. In different circumstances I reckon a lawyer could make a very strong case for this. However the AFL has all the clubs by the nuts. They aren't going to mount a legal challenge to the hand that feeds it (or the hand that's about to squeeze the nuts if you want me to stay with the metaphor.)

If Jamarra had been served notice in say June that he was in breach of contract and it was subsequently terminated (ie after one last chance) then we would have maybe $300k from 2025 off our TPP and $900k from 2026 off our TPP. We would have delisted him at the first opportunity and any club (like GCS) could have picked him up for nothing. This would not only have been a marginally better outcome for us than getting only the $900k for 2026 off the books + pick 74, it would have sent the message that contracts are contracts and will be enforced. It would have shortened the whole process (how much executive and legal counsel expense has this soaked up so far? how much media hoo-ha?) and it would have been a demonstrably fair outcome for all parties. Also there would have been no whispering about how the AFL is operating an unspoken agenda (like "would this have played out differently if Jamarra wasn't the first indigenous NGA #1 pick?")

No doubt we'll get caned by the usual shallow germos for having turned most of our 2020 draft hand into pick 74 but I think the general footy world has a better understanding of the nuance and complexities. And the way our hands have been tied despite doing everything reasonable to support and rehabilitate the player.

In my eyes the ones that come out of this saga looking the worst are, as usual, the AFL.

I wish Jamarra well and hope he makes it back to the AFL senior ranks.

 

[BulldogMuscle]

Good post.
I have no complaints about what GC is doing. Indeed if they can throw him a redemption lifeline I'm very supportive. No reason for them to offer us much at all since they are taking on a considerable risk for a very unlikely (but high) reward.

I think we've been hung out to dry by the AFL though. And that's apart from the possibility of compensation picks.

Essentially what the JUH episode has done is tell the world that a player can default on his AFL contract and still get his full salary without consequences. Some may argue the legal detail on this but its hard to see how he has fulfilled the intent of commitment to train and play for the club.

However this is less about JUH case. More about the impossible situation it puts clubs in generally. And about what signal it will send in future cases.

From what I've read we did everything reasonable to get JUH back on track over about 8 months, at least until mid-year. Then there came a point (perhaps after an internal summit meeting) where the club said "enough". That moment was marked by Bevo saying at a press conference, when asked for the millionth time about Jamarra, that others are handling it now and we need to move on without the ongoing distraction. He said we need to apply our limited player support resources to those who are continuing to train and play for us.

I get the argument against compo picks (ie it's the same sort of situation as Tarryn Thomas etc so stiff cheese) so while a handout like that would be nice it's not something I was expecting. However the AFL should recognise when a contract has been breached and it should allow it to be torn up. This is either BulldogMuscle's option 4, or perhaps it's an option 5. In different circumstances I reckon a lawyer could make a very strong case for this. However the AFL has all the clubs by the nuts. They aren't going to mount a legal challenge to the hand that feeds it (or the hand that's holding the nuts if you want me to stay with the metaphor.)

If Jamarra had been served notice in say June that he was in breach of contract and it was subsequently terminated (ie after one last chance) then we would have maybe $300k from 2025 off our TPP and $900k from 2026 off our TPP. We would have delisted him at the first opportunity and any club (like GCS) could have picked him up for nothing. This would not only have been a marginally better outcome for us than getting only the $900k for 2026 off the books + pick 74, it would have sent the message that contracts are contracts and will be enforced. It would have shortened the whole process (how much executive and legal counsel expense has this soaked up so far? how much media hoo-ha?) and it would have been a demonstrably fair outcome for all parties. Also there would have been no whispering about how the AFL is operating an unspoken agenda (like "would this have played out differently if Jamarra wasn't the first indigenous NGA #1 pick?")

No doubt we'll get caned by the usual shallow germos for having turned most of our 2020 draft hand into pick 74 but I think the general footy world has a better understanding of the nuance and complexities. And the way our hands have been tied despite doing everything reasonable to support and rehabilitate the player.

In my eyes the ones that come out of this saga looking the worst are, as usual, the AFL.

I wish Jamarra well and hope he makes it back to the AFL senior ranks.

100% couldn’t agree more.
As most of us have been saying for far too long, the system is broken when players and managers hold the power they do and clubs are left holding their pants.

Something needs to shift.

 

[Doggies7]

If Curnow goes, Buku ends up being a bigger need for Carlton and they will then have picks 10 and 11 for matching FS bids. Opens the door for my preferred Buku and 33 for pick 22 trade.

 

[Zgope1]

Geelong, hawthorn and Sydney attracting contracted players and offering dogsh*t is so annoying and supported mostly by a gaslighting media.

They’re offering essentially two picks in the teens and at best a good ordinary player. Problem is, two picks in the teens is the equivalent of the old one pick in the early teens before drafts were all compromised. These days they end up in the 20 range.

They need to pony up. It’s disgusting

 

[Pencil case]

Trade lockouts are so BORINGGGGG

Let’s be honest, nothing would happen today until at least 6pm anyway

 

[redmania]

I sense we are done with this trade period unless anything drastic happens — I hold hope! So far it has probably been the worst in the last 5 odd years.